Minimum

# How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile sits at rank 834 out of 3712 tested combos in Minimum, placing it in the top 22.5% of all configurations measured for this game. This is a strong showing, though not a top-tier one, indicating that while this hardware is capable, there are many combinations that deliver higher frame rates in this third-person shooter.

The CPU's percentile rank of 95 among all processors suggests this is a high-end mobile part, and the GPU's 84th percentile among all graphics cards reinforces that. Yet the combo rank of 834 out of 3712 reveals something interesting: the raw component strength does not translate into an elite gaming position. The data suggests that Minimum, despite its 2014 release date, still demands a balanced system, and this pairing delivers solidly but not spectacularly.

Benchmark results indicate that the CPU's nearest rivals — the Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX at 0.1% higher average score, the AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P at 0.4% lower, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX at 0.4% lower, and the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D at 0.6% higher — all cluster within a single percentage point. This tight grouping means the 8945HX is essentially performance-equivalent to its closest competitors in general compute, but the game-specific ranking shows that other factors, likely GPU-driven, dominate the final FPS outcome.

For the GPU, the nearest rivals tell a similar story of tight competition: the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 sits 0.8% higher, the GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile 0.9% higher, the Quadro M6000 24 GB 0.9% higher, and the RTX A6000 0.9% lower. The RTX 4090 Mobile is firmly in a cluster of similar-performing graphics solutions, which explains why the combo rank does not break into the upper echelons — the competition at this level is fierce and margins are thin.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile brings 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a substantial memory configuration for a mobile part, and in Minimum, the data shows that at 4K Ultra settings, the average frame rate drops to 48 FPS — the lowest measured in the entire set. This suggests that at the highest settings and resolution, the GPU's raw throughput becomes the limiting factor, as the memory bandwidth and shading power are pushed to their limits.

The GPU's clock speeds are listed as a base of 1335 MHz and a boost of 1695 MHz, with memory running at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The shading units number 9728, with 304 texture mapping units and 112 raster output pipelines. The pixel rate of 189.8 GPixel/s and texture rate of 515.3 GTexel/s indicate a part capable of handling heavy rasterization workloads, which aligns with the 4K Medium result of 74 FPS average (with a 63 FPS minimum and 86 FPS maximum).

The FP32 compute of 32.98 TFLOPS (and matching FP16 at 32.98 TFLOPS) shows that this GPU is not just about memory — it has substantial compute headroom. Yet in Minimum, the scaling from 1080p to 4K shows the GPU becoming the bottleneck at higher resolutions. At 1080p Low, the combo hits 280 FPS average, but at 4K Ultra, it falls to 48 FPS — a drop of 232 FPS, or roughly 83% lower. This dramatic falloff is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario at high resolutions, where the 16 GB memory pool and bandwidth are fully utilized.

The GPU's benchmark scores reinforce its position: Passmark G3D scores 27212, Geekbench OpenCL scores 180831, and Vulkan scores 170774. These place it in the 84th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 43667. The nearest rival, the RTX A6000, is just 0.9% lower, showing that this mobile GPU competes with desktop workstation parts in raw compute — yet in gaming, the mobile thermal and power constraints (120 W TDP) may cap sustained performance.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals clear resolution scaling patterns. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 280 FPS average; moving to 1440p Low drops this to 180 FPS (a 35.7% reduction), and at 4K Low it falls further to 97 FPS (a 65.4% reduction from 1080p). This steep decline indicates that even at Low settings, resolution increases place significant strain on the system, with the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth becoming increasingly taxed.

For High settings, the progression is: 180 FPS at 1080p, 116 FPS at 1440p (a 35.6% drop), and 62 FPS at 4K (a 65.6% drop from 1080p). The consistency of these percentage drops across Low and High settings — both around 35% from 1080p to 1440p and 65% from 1080p to 4K — suggests a uniform scaling behavior that points to the GPU as the primary limiter. The CPU, with its 16 cores and 32 threads boosting to 5.40 GHz, is unlikely to be the constraint at these resolutions, as its compute power remains relatively underutilized compared to the GPU's rendering load.

Ultra settings show the most dramatic scaling: 137 FPS at 1080p, 88 FPS at 1440p (a 35.8% drop), and 48 FPS at 4K (a 65.0% drop from 1080p). This pattern is remarkably consistent across all settings levels, with the 1440p to 4K transition always costing roughly 45-46% of the 1440p frame rate. The data implies that Minimum scales nearly linearly with pixel count, and the limiting component at higher resolutions is clearly the GPU's rendering throughput rather than CPU performance.

The Medium settings row provides the only min/max data in the entire set, showing at 1080p a range of 182-246 FPS around a 214 FPS average, at 1440p a range of 117-159 around 138 FPS, and at 4K a range of 63-86 around 74 FPS. These ranges indicate frame time consistency degrades as resolution increases — the spread between min and max grows proportionally, suggesting that the GPU's workload becomes more variable at higher resolutions.

Settings Recommendations

For players prioritizing smooth frame rates, the Low preset at 1080p delivers 280 FPS average — far beyond any display's refresh rate and providing maximum headroom for competitive play. At 1440p Low, 180 FPS still offers excellent fluidity, while 4K Low at 97 FPS remains above the 60 FPS threshold for comfortable gameplay.

The Medium preset appears to be the sweet spot for visual quality versus performance. At 1080p, it delivers 214 FPS average (with 182 FPS minimum), which is only 23.5% lower than Low but with noticeably better visuals. At 1440p Medium, 138 FPS average (117 FPS minimum) keeps gameplay smooth, and even 4K Medium at 74 FPS (63 FPS minimum) stays above the 60 FPS mark, making this the highest resolution at which the combo can maintain playable frame rates with improved fidelity.

High settings at 1080p produce 180 FPS, matching the 1440p Low result exactly — an interesting coincidence that suggests the visual quality jump from Medium to High costs roughly the same performance as a resolution increase from 1080p to 1440p. At 1440p High, 116 FPS remains playable, but 4K High at 62 FPS barely clears the 60 FPS threshold, making it risky for games with sudden frame drops.

Ultra settings are the most demanding, with 1080p Ultra at 137 FPS being the only resolution where this preset stays comfortably above 60 FPS. At 1440p Ultra, 88 FPS is acceptable for slower-paced play, but 4K Ultra at 48 FPS falls below the standard for smooth gameplay. The data suggests that for the best balance, Medium at 1440p or 4K provides the most consistent experience, while competitive players should favor Low at 1080p or 1440p.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Minimum?*

A: Based on the measured data, 1440p Medium at 138 FPS average (117 FPS minimum) offers the best balance of visual quality and performance, while 1080p Low at 280 FPS provides the highest frame rates for competitive play.

*Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in Minimum?*

A: Yes, but only at Medium settings (74 FPS average) or Low settings (97 FPS average). At High settings, 4K drops to 62 FPS, and Ultra falls to 48 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS standard.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX scores within 0.6% of its closest competitors — the Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX (0.1% higher), AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P (0.4% lower), AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX (0.4% lower), and AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D (0.6% higher) — indicating near-identical general compute performance.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU the bottleneck in this game?

A: The resolution scaling data (consistent 35% drops from 1080p to 1440p and 65% drops to 4K across all settings) strongly indicates the GPU is the limiting component at higher resolutions, while the CPU's 16 cores and 32 threads provide ample headroom.

Q: What frame rates can I expect at 1080p with different settings?

A: Low delivers 280 FPS, Medium 214 FPS (182-246 range), High 180 FPS, and Ultra 137 FPS average, based on the measured data.

*Q: How does this combo rank overall for Minimum?*

A: It ranks 834th out of 3712 tested combinations, placing it in the top 22.5% of all configurations measured for this game.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX is a 16-core, 32-thread processor from the 8000 series, built on the Zen 4 architecture with a Dragon Range codename. Its base clock of 2.50 GHz boosts to 5.40 GHz, and it features a 64 MB L3 cache with 1 MB L2 per core and 64 KB L1 per core. The CPU's 5 nm process node from TSMC packs 13,140 million transistors across a 2x 71 mm² die size, with a 55 W TDP that is modest for a 16-core mobile part.

In Minimum, the CPU's role appears secondary to the GPU, given the consistent resolution scaling patterns. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 42713 and single-core score of 6030 demonstrate substantial processing power, while Passmark multithread at 51405 and single-thread at 3907 reinforce this. The CPU's 95th percentile ranking among all processors, with an average benchmark score of 76212, places it just 0.1% above the Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX — essentially a statistical tie.

The memory support for DDR5 with dual-channel configuration and 83.2 GB/s bandwidth provides adequate data throughput for gaming, and the PCIe Gen 5 with 28 lanes ensures the GPU has a high-bandwidth connection. The integrated Radeon 610M graphics are present but irrelevant for this dedicated GPU configuration. The CPU's unlocked multiplier and active production status suggest it is a current-generation part, released in 2025, which aligns with its high benchmark scores.

For Minimum, the CPU's 16 cores and 32 threads are likely underutilized, as the game's 2014 release predates the multi-core era's full exploitation. The high single-core performance (Cinebench R15 single-core at 607, R20 at 2532, R23 at 6030) ensures that any single-threaded game logic runs efficiently, but the bottleneck at higher resolutions clearly shifts to the GPU. The Passmark physics score of 2168 and integer math at 195180 suggest strong computational capabilities that exceed what this game likely demands.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured average frame rates span from 280 FPS at Low settings down to 137 FPS at Ultra. The Medium preset delivers 214 FPS average with a minimum of 182 FPS and maximum of 246 FPS, providing the most complete data point. High settings produce 180 FPS average, and the progression from Low to Ultra shows a 51.1% reduction in frame rate (280 to 137 FPS), indicating that each settings tier costs roughly 15-20% performance.

At 2560x1440, the average frame rates range from 180 FPS at Low to 88 FPS at Ultra. Medium settings achieve 138 FPS average (117 FPS minimum, 159 FPS maximum), while High delivers 116 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p at each settings level is consistent: Low falls 100 FPS (35.7%), Medium falls 76 FPS (35.5%), High falls 64 FPS (35.6%), and Ultra falls 49 FPS (35.8%). This uniformity across all settings strongly suggests a GPU-limited scenario where pixel count directly determines performance.

At 3840x2160, the average frame rates drop to 97 FPS at Low, 74 FPS at Medium (63 FPS minimum, 86 FPS maximum), 62 FPS at High, and 48 FPS at Ultra. The 4K to 1440p transition costs roughly 46% of the 1440p frame rate at every settings level: Low drops from 180 to 97 FPS (46.1%), Medium from 138 to 74 FPS (46.4%), High from 116 to 62 FPS (46.6%), and Ultra from 88 to 48 FPS (45.5%). The consistency of these percentages — both across settings and across resolution transitions — provides strong evidence that the GPU's rendering throughput is the single limiting factor in this game, with the CPU providing more than enough headroom to avoid becoming a bottleneck at any settings combination.